Anyone with an opinion on a good narrow bore D chanter?

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Sun Apr 13, 2003 10:46 pm

I think you're right Mac, that makes a lot more sense. I can see where the coiled spring resembles the regular shape of turrets you see mounted on old buildings. I think there's a turreted sea shell also named for this shape.

Dave Parkhurst · Post by **Dave Parkhurst** » Thu Apr 17, 2003 12:41 am

Nope, never lived in Vancouver or played a fiddle. I play my Angus chanter with a Lynch half-set. It has a F natural turret-style (wraps around the barrel, very nice) and a Cnat key.
Dave

jqpublick · Post by **jqpublick** » Sat Apr 19, 2003 7:31 am

Hey all;

Just my two cents worth here. I play a couple of very loud instruments (djembe, bass drums) and the idea of being able to play something quiet, sweet and expressive appeals to me, which is why I want a narrow bore chanter.

Also, I've been given to understand that they are more expressive than the wide bore chanters generally (and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I'm still a rank beginner) and the chanter that I play has two settings; in the box waiting to be played and BLOODY LOUD. There's no inbetween. I think my roommate, neighbours and surrounding canine populace may thank me for the switch. Dogs stare at the house as they pass by if I'm playing.... come to think of it they stare when I'm not... could it be the hanging meats?

I also don't want to go to sessions yet with a loud chanter because I don't want to control the tunes, I want to learn them; flute players are often lost in the mix of guitar/bango/bodhran but they still play, right? (Unless you're Harry, and then most people are too busy staring, gape-mouthed at speedy virtuosity to play along; I saw him in Toronto and my God! the man can play.)

I love expressive playing and if a different kind of chanter build can assist me with that, then why not? I realize I should be able to play however I want, but I'm not good enough yet to do that.

Most people play in D when playing this style of music, so to me that would be why narrow bore buyers are interested in D chanters.

I'm probably making the more experienced members of this forum roll their eyes, but hey, if a beginner can't fumble in front of those better than they, where can we go for support and encouragement? Oh, yea, mom....

Mark

Antaine · Post by **Antaine** » Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:15 am

I have three chanters - the rebuilt one from Tim Britton is BLOODY LOUD, and so I rarely, if ever, use it. The pakistani one is quieter, and the one from Bruce Childress is quieter still. I can play with chanter and drones with an unamplified fiddle or even sing along (as I once had to do with The Parting Glass) and they're all (including Bruce's) wide bore chanters. You may not have to go through all the trouble of finding a narrow bore D. It may just be the reed (prolly the case with my britton rebuild) or the chanter may be replaced but either way, it'd prolly be cheaper than looking for an NB D. if you want to hear the childress one we might be able to arrange a phone call.

Dave Parkhurst · Post by **Dave Parkhurst** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 2:15 am

Well, after all was said & done, Bob May traded me a narrow bore chanter he made for some reeds for his chanter. I'll have to say, I made out like a bandito on that one... Bob doesn't make them professionally (he's a truck driver) but if he ever did, he'd have one helluva backorder list. The chanter is a narrow bore D, based on Coyne, made out of diamondwood and looks remarkably like dark teak or rosewood. The tuning is immaculate. If he had mounted a Cnat key on it, I'd have thought I'd died and gone to heaven... as it is, it's a marvelous instrument.

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:46 am

Diamondwood... that's the resin impregnated decorative plywood product right?

http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/favorites. ... =9944&cs=1

Idwood · Post by **Idwood** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:05 am

jqpublick wrote:the idea of being able to play something quiet, sweet and expressive appeals to me, which is why I want a narrow bore chanter.

Mark

Mark,
to my opinion it is not necessary to have a narrow bore chanter to achieve quiet, sweet and expressive UP sounds. I own a Rogge NB chanter and it is a very fine instrument, but usually I play an old Brian Howard WB D chanter I made two reeds for - a normal one which produces a loudness comparable to a loud fiddle (for sessions) and one with a very thin and soft reed which is much quieter. I use the latter one for exercising and for recording sessions. Amplification is not an issue nowadays. So I think, with the appropriate reed you could produce the sound you want without using a narrow bore chanter.
On the other hand, to make the chanter sound so smooth, you might sometimes have to use some mean tricks like rushing the staple, and as a possible consequence to maintain exact tuning, it could be necessary to rush the bore itself, so that you end up with a kind of selfmade narrow bore.

It is a matter of choice - and of investment, I think.

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 5:42 am

Idwood, you made a good point about re-reeding a wide bore D to play quietly. I have only been able to do this with (and still be in tune) my O'Grady cocobolo chanter using O'Grady reeds.
My style of play is more into tone bending and vibrato and I find my Wooff narrow bore D chanter less suited for this. The notes are crisp and more accurate playing the narrow D. There's much to be said about a strong reed in a wide bore D chanter where you can feel the 'buzz' through your fingers.
I'm awaiting a narrow bore D from Bagpipeworks ordered a while back. My last update indicated it's nearly finished... just awaiting keywork and reedcap, so I'll soon have another narrow bore D to compare.

Idwood · Post by **Idwood** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:50 am

Tony wrote:so I'll soon have another narrow bore D to compare.

Lucky you! Should be quite interesting to know about. Please keep us updated!

Mypipes · Post by **Mypipes** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:07 am

I have been playing my narrow bore Angus D alot more lately and have found it quite pleasing! The narrowbore chanters have set me back in playing as the pressure is more easy to over blow. I still have touble landing the bottom D without ..well ya know what happens with too much pressure or a misplaced finger..its a disaster sometimes. I 've only a year under the belt so this stuff happens. Anyone buying a narrow D or any flat pitch for that matter should know that they take some geting used to but are real easy to play once you get the pressure down.

jqpublick · Post by **jqpublick** » Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:51 am

Hey all;

Since I wrote that last bit of mine three months ago, I've recieved a chanter from Joe Kennedy, which is sweeter, more in tune, quieter and more expressive. I couldn't be happier, unless I could play it better. I won't need to do anything at all to this chanter, I'm thorougly pleased by it. If I can I might post some pictures. Joe had mentioned that he has been experimenting with matching narrow bore sound with wide bore volume. Don't quote me on that, though, the conversation was a while back. I'm very very happy with the chanter and I'm looking forward to recieving the half-set I've ordered from him. Thanks all,

Mark

bcpipes · Post by **bcpipes** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 4:28 pm

Hi Gang,

IMHO - Be in-tune. Then "sweet and mellow" will take care of itself.

Cheers,
BC

djm · Post by **djm** » Thu Jul 10, 2003 2:32 pm

Sorry, BC. Can't agree. Being in tune and overall tone are two different things. Anychanter/reed combination should be close as far as tuning goes, but there are two distinct types of chanter: the loud and harsh vs the sweet and smooth.

I have to agree with Mark. I am very pleased with my Joe Kennedy set, both the tone and the overall quality.

djm

bcpipes · Post by **bcpipes** » Fri Jul 11, 2003 12:10 pm

True enough,

But, Loud isn't necessarily harsh, and "Sweet and Smooth" says nothing about Volume. Do you mean: Sweet, smooth and quiet? (I've heard plenty of chanters that sound good that way) Tone (timbre) and volume are 2 different things. I've heard them loud, sweet and smooth, too. That's the way I prefer mine. The track of bagpipe developement, over the centuries has been to higher pitches and thus higher volumes (or at least the perception of higher volume that higher pitch entails. The human perception of musical tones is an important consideration in the manufacture of any instrument. Each register has it's own color and properties). If that wasn't a good thing, it would never have happened. With so much emphasis on "Quieter" chanters, could the developement of the Uilleann Pipes considered in retrograde? After all, the highland pipes are still slowly continuing into the higher pitch, to this day.

I think of Mark Hillman who, at North Hero 1987, had a "Foghorn Chanter". It was indeed about the loudest I've heard. He played very well, and was in near-perfect tune. It, therefore, sounded good. Everybody said his chanter was loud. Nobody said they didn't like his playing.

It's certainly all a matter of preference. Me? I want all the instruments in the sessium to bellow it out. Drown out that cash register, fer gosh sakes. I don't like a thin scratchy fiddle, fer instance. But some insist on setting them up that way.

It could be a matter of confidence, too. I usually resign myself to playing the 4 or 5 tunes, that I know well, at a sessiun. This is because my chanter is realatively (not screaming) loud. If your chanter is loud, you had better know the tune(s). I don't enjoy playing a quiet chanter. I have also been able to get narrow bores as loud as my wide bore (a relative term. My wide bore is narrower than most I've examined). So that brings us back to: All things being equal, it's mostly in the reed, man (and, very important, the air-moving and retaining efficiency of the whole system).

Cheers,
BC

Tony · Post by **Tony** » Fri Jul 11, 2003 12:56 pm

My wide bore is narrower than most I've examined

Agreed. At least at the bell.
I just checked it with a piece of cane for a probe (no measuring instruments around) so they are only guesstimates comparing four D chanters.

Bruce, using your chanter as reference, the narrow bore D looks about 1mm smaller. O'Grady about 1.5-2mm wider and Simack is probably 2-2.5mm wider.

I posted this image on another thread, but you can see the length (reed tip to bell) is nearly identical to all three D chanters. The differences were hole placement and hole size.

Top to bottom:
Gallagher C
Wooff narrow D
Simack D
Childress D

Chiff and Fipple Forums

Anyone with an opinion on a good narrow bore D chanter?

Narrow bore